Thanks people, really appreciate your listening time and comments. It's a busy old internet so just getting someone to listen is great.
Stratisfear wrote:
The flight of a phalanx of rebellious bumblebees, who have got hold of a permanent marker and painted their yellow stripes black (simultaneously getting high on the fumes, of course).
Dude. You make me LOL. Please don't tell people I sniff permanent markers to get inspired. They may copy my style HAHAHAHA.
doc-phil wrote:
How much of your lead writing is based on theory, and how much is just based on feel? Do you follow any particular scale patterns?
I've pondered this myself. It's zero theory. It's sort of geometrical to me; I know scale shapes and arpeggio shapes. I know "the phrygian shape", "the locrian shape"' etc. I'll work out what scale shape sounds "right" in a given position and work it from there, experiment and listen to the mistakes - mistakes are great for getting you to a creative place you could not arrive at linearly. And try to do something different. Like a major arpeggio can never be 3 semitones up from another major, it doesn't occur in the diatonic system...so I'll try things like that. Maybe it sounds terrible, so I'll try something else. Let the backing track repeat and rip it up...etc. Let's just say a studio muso on an hourly rate couldn't work like this LOL! And I DO NOT propose this as the best way to learn!!
I should say also, leads take maybe 2% of total recording time. But that's because I've spent all my years just wanting to play leads, running scales up and down endlessly...all that stuff we're told not to do HAHA. There are mistakes in the leads I leave 'cos it's part of the take and I like it the way it is. Writing the music and then playing the riffs sufficiently tight I find a lot harder. If you're doubling or trebling riffs those suckers have to be incredibly precise...that's demanding!
